Space Infrastructure - Go to Mars' moons first, for a base?

John_Frazer · 2002-09-03 13:29:58

Transplanting a sub-topic which started budding off in the "Energy Transfer" topic, this seemed to need discussion of its own, as a new sort of mission architecture.
Note the links I provided in that thread, as a background for why I feel confident with this proposal.

I don't know if the doom and gloom over 0.38G is justified

I don't either. I do know for a fact that it's far safer and more conservative to say that we do know for a fact that we can fairly easily provide full G for the crew, and that they'll be entirely healthy in it.
Nothing of the sort can be said for low G, and it'll be a long time before we're certain -a long time of space missions to find out, unless you're able to find a crew to volunteer to be highly paid for the remainder of their lives spent in therapy to regain their health. Even if they're not physically ruined by the long exposure to low G, they don't know if they will be, before they launch. You're going to have to pay them very well for the gamble, and run the risk of being known for using up a crew just for impatience and not being willing to do your homework.

This started when I talked about a modicum of space infrastructure around Mars' moons being better than dropping exploration crews on the planet, with no attention paid to space industry.
Mars Direct leaves in place a network of safe havens and exploration gear on the planet. This is great for exploring the planet, but a little effort on Ph&D does far more. Near-term profitability is the big one. Get tanks of water or other chemicals back to EO, and the missions are paid for right away, along with bankrolling the future of the Mars effort.
The infrastructure of the water factory at Ph&D is easily built up to a more complete factory (In the same timescale as 3-5 Mars Direct missions, let alone building any sort of semi-permanent base on the planet.)
Cable & rock dust for concrete (shielding and structure in one piece, far more robust and actually cheaper than the alternatives), and rolled & stamped metalsfrom sapce resources are used to build a base from tools & finely machined parts brought from Earth (Zubrin pointed out the difficulty of making something as small as a screw & nut; we bring along screws, and make the dumb bulk beams out of moon dust).
Settle for .38G on the way out, but the same habs are built up at the base, with extra truss length and strength for spinning newly shielded habs for full G.

The base isn't mass sensitive, so we build the bulky parts of the base from materials easily gotten in space, from the skeleton delivered by the transit habs.
Graphically showing my point, first for low G, unshielded habs:
habs = 5-15 tons, spin cable = ~3tons
now for Full G, shielded habs
habs = 750 tons, truss = 2500 tons
(SWAG, for ~Mars Direct sized habs. Feel free to pick the asumptions apart, but I doubt the picture gets any better than this.)
Far easier to bring along tools to build the larger habs from moon dust, especially since the same infrastructure provides profits for the Mars effort, as well as a strong support base for the exploration of the planet.

Now we've got fairly early sustained funding for the Mars effort, and completely livable conditions for long duration crew stays at/around Mars.

John_Frazer · 2002-09-03 13:49:54

Cheaply copied links, supporting the idea

I've become attached to a few ideas I've found. ASAP build a spinning 1G fully shielded hab in Mars orbit. Make it possible for crews to stay long-term without any health effects, build up to more crew, with more equipment and landers and fuel depots, allow extensive telerobotic exploration of the planet while crews are rotating in & out.
Above all, provide some means of profit... Water! Other chemicals, and easy transport back to Earth orbit -and buyers. (none of this is mine: "Plagiarism is copying from one source, while research is copying from many sources".)

The Diemos Water Company article points out the benefits of going to Mars' moons.
See also the book "Mars 1999" by Brian O'Leary. He suggests that the first Mars mission goes to the moons first, to make fuel and establish the base/chemical extraction factory before comitting to landing. The first and every crew carries a tank of water back to LEO when they return. (O'Leary used the phrase "Ph&D" for Mars' moons)

See the Bootstrapping space industries article by Bruce Mackenzie. Note especially his spinning station/depot design, and the emphasis on bootstrapping. Ideal for the Ph&D orbit Mars base.

This one can't be over estimated
Projects to Employ Resources of the Moon and Asteroids Near Earth in the Near Term
http://permanent.com/

I think it answers many ill-informed objections about space processing, space industries, etc. There is literally tons of info out there on space processing, and for evey doubtful part of a process, there are several other ways which would work.

Near Earth Object Fuel (neofuel.com)

Maybe also to the point here, is this:
http://members.aol.com/oscarcombs/spacsetl.htm#zubrin]
Didn't Robert Zubrin debunk this whole SPS/space settlements scenario in his book "Entering Space"?
from the Space Settlement F.A.Q.

Phobos · 2002-09-03 18:41:02

I've become attached to a few ideas I've found. ASAP build a spinning 1G fully shielded hab in Mars orbit. Make it possible for crews to stay long-term without any health effects, build up to more crew, with more equipment and landers and fuel depots, allow extensive telerobotic exploration of the planet while crews are rotating in & out.
Above all, provide some means of profit... Water! Other chemicals, and easy transport back to Earth orbit -and buyers. (none of this is mine: "Plagiarism is copying from one source, while research is copying from many sources".)

Is it possible to agree 200%? I don't think you could find a more effective way of maintaining health among long time residents of Mars than to have a spinning space station for people to rotate in and out of. On top of that, with in situ propellant factories and greenhouses on the surface, food, fuel, and maybe water could be provided to the spinning space station from Mars itself. I think once enough habs and people have been sent on the red planet something like this won't be out of the question.

I think it answers many ill-informed objections about space processing, space industries, etc. There is literally tons of info out there on space processing, and for evey doubtful part of a process, there are several other ways which would work.

Screw the hardcore cynics who can't develop a vision past yesterday.

C.COMMARMOND (FR) · 2002-09-05 12:41:47

Phobos, as said on another thread, we can do it on the Mars floor cheaper.

Maybe this thread is dead ?

CC

John_Frazer · 2002-09-11 16:52:22

Not dead yet. Posts sent on Sept 3, 4, and 5. I just can't get back as often as I might wish.

What does "Mars floor" mean?

"Phobos" wrote
> On top of that, with in situ propellant
factories and greenhouses on the surface, food,
fuel, and maybe water could be provided to the
spinning space station from Mars itself.

Not upwards. Upwards travel is difficult. If a resource is in hand on the planet, it's more valuable there, to be used for supporting exploration. Resources needed by the space base/hab are much more easily gotten in space, from space resources. As I said earlier, it's inconceivable that Martian reources could out-compete space resources.
Far more likely for a while, that the line would point downwards, with activities on the planet consuming stuff made in space. Any long-term base on the planet (where explorers might base from, during their tour on the surface) would certainly have fuel production, water if possible, but it's more likely that processed items (food maybe) would be dropped in from the space facilities.

> I think once enough habs and people have
been sent on the red planet something like this
won't be out of the question.

Why not at the start? is my point. Install the space infrastructure and profit making base ASAP.
Have profit flowing back into it and a livable hab (Fully shielded and full G) within a year of starting activity at/around Mars.
Send hardhat types first, to establish a habitable base and income immediately, then worry about bringing in dedicated trained explorers to crawl around turning over rocks. ("habitable base" meaning that people can live there with absolutely no concerns about radiation & gravity adaptation, and people on the surface are never more than a few hours and only a few km/s away from support)

Bill White · 2002-09-11 17:09:17

Do you truly believe that a permanent installation orbiting Mars would be cheaper and safer than a permanent installation on the planet's surface?

I would foresee a permanent orbital station very soon after a permanent Mars settlement and dropping resources from Phobos or Deimos onto the surface of Mars is a great idea, but how would an orbital station maintain adequate food and water, indefinitely?

Phobos · 2002-09-12 17:51:52

I would foresee a permanent orbital station very soon after a permanent Mars settlement and dropping resources from Phobos or Deimos onto the surface of Mars is a great idea, but how would an orbital station maintain adequate food and water, indefinitely?

I imagine the space station wouldn't have any problems keeping itself supplied with food and water as long as water could be extracted from the two moons. That's assuming the people on board would have the agricultural expertise and equipment to keep propagating productive plants. But I'm somewhat skeptical that we'd need a Martian spacestation if its primary function is to keep people exposed to 1g. But who knows, it might turn out that people must stay immersed in 1g environments for a significant amount of time in order to reap the benefits. Those mice will shed light on the subject hopefully.

C.COMMARMOND (FR) · 2002-09-13 12:11:12

Hi,

even if I said this thread could be dead because the same topics are discussed on another thread, I'd like to give a 'pro' word to the idea of a permanent Mars orbital station.

Why ?

Because all the modules sent to the Mars surface will be pushed from Earth with some rocket. These one will probably have solar panel, tanks... So just have to add an hab module and connect it to all these power suppliers and get a permanent space station. It could be helpfull for moons exploitation and space fuel services.

But this could be a 'second mission' program since first, we have to be sure life is possible on Mars.

I will think about this too. (I am writing a big program for Mars colonization with friends...)

CC

Phobos · 2002-09-13 16:26:39

Because all the modules sent to the Mars surface will be pushed from Earth with some rocket. These one will probably have solar panel, tanks... So just have to add an hab module and connect it to all these power suppliers and get a permanent space station. It could be helpfull for moons exploitation and space fuel services.

I hope that if they do put a spacestation in orbit around Mars its for the reasons you mentioned and not because people will need the 1g. If we have to go to a spacestation because our bodies can't withstand the low-g environment for long periods of time I think Mars colonization will be out of the question. Of course the spinning spacestation might still prove beneficial just to keep people acclimated to Earth's gravity even if it turns out possible for people to live in .38g indefinately.

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#1 2002-09-03 13:29:58

Re: Space Infrastructure - Go to Mars' moons first, for a base?

#2 2002-09-03 13:49:54

Re: Space Infrastructure - Go to Mars' moons first, for a base?

#3 2002-09-03 18:41:02

Re: Space Infrastructure - Go to Mars' moons first, for a base?

#4 2002-09-05 12:41:47

Re: Space Infrastructure - Go to Mars' moons first, for a base?

#5 2002-09-11 16:52:22

Re: Space Infrastructure - Go to Mars' moons first, for a base?

#6 2002-09-11 17:09:17

Re: Space Infrastructure - Go to Mars' moons first, for a base?

#7 2002-09-12 17:51:52

Re: Space Infrastructure - Go to Mars' moons first, for a base?

#8 2002-09-13 12:11:12

Re: Space Infrastructure - Go to Mars' moons first, for a base?

#9 2002-09-13 16:26:39

Re: Space Infrastructure - Go to Mars' moons first, for a base?

Board footer